Author Topic: .50 caliber tunnel gun in the A20 Please? (Read 895 times)

Rasker · « **on:** December 02, 2004, 03:39:52 PM »

Quote

Originally posted by Widewing
Originally, HTC said that the ventral gun was left off due to not having photos of the interior to model. Not long after, photos were posted here.... It wasn't a major priority though.

The ventral gun installation on the A-20G was a single .50 caliber machine gun. Earlier models mounted a single, and sometimes a pair of .30 (depending on who was using the aircraft it could be 30-06, .303 or 7.5mm) caliber MGs.

My regards,

Widewing

from A20: Dangerous Dogfighter Thread in Aircraft & Vehicles

Mitsu · « **Reply #1 on:** December 02, 2004, 06:57:49 PM »

they can't, because currently they working for my Ki-100 and Ki-43!

Karnak · « **Reply #2 on:** December 02, 2004, 07:02:34 PM »

Rasker,

I was told by one A-20G pilot that all the aircraft in his squadron had the ventral gun removed. He said they flew so low that the ventral gunner would never be of use against fighters and would simply be a third man dead if they got shot down. He also said that removing the gun was not an uncommon practice.

What it boils down to is that yu can look at our A-20G the same way you can look at our Mosquito, as not the best possible version of the aircraft but still valid of what served in WWII.

cobia38 · « **Reply #3 on:** December 02, 2004, 11:55:46 PM »

oh sure make it hevy,r then it allready is

a single 50. cal ventral would be useless unless someone crawled up your 6 to 400 out and stayed perfectly still till for you.
and we all know that aint gonna happen.heck the twin 50.s in the top turent are just dead wheight too,cant seem to find anyone who can track a target while dogfighting:lol

my 2 cents

Rasker · « **Reply #4 on:** December 03, 2004, 08:12:53 AM »

"oh sure make it hevy,r then it allready is

"

-I dont mind, this bird can take a bunch of extra weight while performing nicely!

"a single 50. cal ventral would be useless unless someone crawled up your 6 to 400 out and stayed perfectly still till for you. and we all know that aint gonna happen."

-Heh guess what happens *all* the time in the absence of the ventral gun

A single .50 should discourage that nicely.

"heck the twin 50.s in the top turent are just dead wheight too,cant seem to find anyone who can track a target while dogfighting:lol"

-Actually the upper dual .50 turret is very useful whether you have a gunner or just gunning yerself while steering by rudder]. An A20 pilot and gunner used to working together should be able to rack up kills like mad in one-v-one's against almost any type plane, especially after the eggs are gone. Perhaps you were thinking of the lighter upper turret on the Boston III, which some advise you to just pretend ain't there.

Zanth · « **Reply #5 on:** December 03, 2004, 08:14:49 AM »

Superfly wrote the reason this gun isnt on the a20, didnt have anything to do with history. (THere is already a huge thread on this) It looks like now he now has what he needs, but this isnt high on the priority list.

From Aircraft and Vehicles forum:

That position was left out intentionally of the Boston 3 and A20-G because of lack of photographic reference. If someone can actually find what it looked like inside the plane from that position, then it may be possible to add it to the plane. I spent a long, long time looking for pictures to no avail.

__________________
John "Superfly" Guytan - Art Director
HiTech Creations
-=HELLFIRE=- SQUAD

Karnak · « **Reply #6 on:** December 03, 2004, 11:01:25 AM »

Zanth,

I know why it was left off.

All I was suggesting is that A) it is historically accurate and B) that he can look at it in that way if historical accuracy is one of his motivations to see the gun added.

Zanth · « **Reply #7 on:** December 03, 2004, 02:20:13 PM »

Oh I would love to see the field modification door opened, I really would. While there are several interesting things that were done in the field (it is a huge list), HTC hasn't been into that up to now. They have stuck to as designed and delivered criterion and I suppose wisely so.

cobia38 · « **Reply #8 on:** December 03, 2004, 05:32:40 PM »

Quote

Originally posted by Rasker

"a single 50. cal ventral would be useless unless someone crawled up your 6 to 400 out and stayed perfectly still till for you. and we all know that aint gonna happen."

-Heh guess what happens *all* the time in the absence of the ventral gun A single .50 should discourage that nicely.

hehe you fly a20 totaly diferent then me then,the only time that happens is when i,m afk,cause if ther below me i,m going at them nose first,I dont fly a20 defencivly i fly it agresivly.

"heck the twin 50.s in the top turent are just dead wheight too,cant seem to find anyone who can track a target while dogfighting:lol"

-Actually the upper dual .50 turret is very useful whether you have a gunner or just gunning yerself while steering by rudder]. An A20 pilot and gunner used to working together should be able to rack up kills like mad in one-v-one's against almost any type plane, especially after the eggs are gone. Perhaps you were thinking of the lighter upper turret on the Boston III, which some advise you to just pretend ain't there.

i would be willing to bet that if you gunned for me you would not beable to keep up with the manuvers long enuff to get a kill in the turent. and the boston,s 303,s suck along with the roll rate.

Ack-Ack · « **Reply #9 on:** December 03, 2004, 06:22:32 PM »

Quote

Originally posted by Rasker

-Actually the upper dual .50 turret is very useful whether you have a gunner or just gunning yerself while steering by rudder]. An A20 pilot and gunner used to working together should be able to rack up kills like mad in one-v-one's against almost any type plane, especially after the eggs are gone. Perhaps you were thinking of the lighter upper turret on the Boston III, which some advise you to just pretend ain't there.

Actually, Cobia is right. The top turret is useless in the A-20G we have due to the limited field of fire. Even with an experienced gunner in the plane, it's still useless as it's very easy to approach it in the field of fire blindspots. One blind spot is on it's dead six. come in level at dead 6 or slightly lower and the top turret won't have a shot.

ack-ack

Rasker · « **Reply #10 on:** December 03, 2004, 11:30:15 PM »

Assuming either crew member was able to spot the approaching dead 6 bandit (and no excuses for not doing that wth the f3 view), the A20 should be able to initiate some combination of turn and roll (and perhaps a bit of rudder) to put the bandit within the dorsal's field of fire (with a high 5-to-7oclock zero deflection shot) and hold that turn for a long period of time while the bandit struggles to bring its nose around and keep it pointed. Even if the bandit commences firing at the same time the dorsal does, you then have a contest between the relative damage inflicting capability of each set of guns, and the damage absoption capacity of each airframe, a losing proposition for most fighters vs the A20, I'd guess. I would think the A20's big wing allows it to outturn many fighter planes (like it's Airwarrior cousin A26) in which case the bandit is taking damage without inflicting any, and that big set of nose guns is gradually moving closer. Just my theory about the A20, but I and some crew mates had a lot of success doing this with the A26 in Airwarrior (without using the 26's lower turret at all).

Ack-Ack · « **Reply #11 on:** December 04, 2004, 06:02:35 PM »

And then all the attacking plane has to do is match the bank turn the with a slight lag to will again put the attacking plane in the field of fire blind spot.

I fly the A-20 quite a bit and almost always as a fighter and believe me, the top turret is useless in this game.

ack-ack

GreenCloud · « **Reply #12 on:** December 04, 2004, 06:23:15 PM »

akak..you give too much props to the ftrs who have nto a clue about attking nme planes...

i see many ..many "ftrs" who attk very unwisley

Rasker · « **Reply #13 on:** December 04, 2004, 07:17:19 PM »

akak, perhaps the very best turning fighters would be able to keep a sustained lag turn in the 6 or low-6 oclock against a gunned A20, [and that's assuming that the A20 doesnt simply roll to move the bandit back into the dorsal's field of fire]. My impression is that most fighters would be forced to adopt a high side b&z method of attack, leading to a lot of pings while they doing this.

I fly B-26s a lot, and most bogeys have real trouble keeping their noses close to a B26 doing a simple rudder turn from the gunner position. Oh well, something to experiment with, I guess.

Ack-Ack · « **Reply #14 on:** December 04, 2004, 08:59:18 PM »

Quote

Originally posted by GreenCloud
akak..you give too much props to the ftrs who have nto a clue about attking nme planes...

i see many ..many "ftrs" who attk very unwisley

True. I was going by how I would approach the situation and engage a gunned A-20.

ack-ack